To

Mr. Kapil SibalHon’ble Minister for Human Resources Development,Ministry of Human Resources DevelopmentGovernment of India

The Rajya Sabha on 23rd April 2012 passed amendments to the RTE Act 2009. A significant number of these amendments are concerned with the education of children with disabilities. One amendment in particular talks about giving the choice of home based education to children with multiple disabilities and to children with severe disabilities.

“Provided that a child with multiple disabilities referred to in clause (h) of section 2 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 and a child with severe disability referred to in clause (o) of section 2 of the National Trust for Welfare of Persons with Autism, Cerebral Palsy, Mental Retardation and Multiple Disabilities Act, 1999 may also have the right to opt for home-based education”.

We oppose this amendment and would like to point out providing home based education as an option to school education for children with multiple and severe disabilities is an extremely retrogressive step which will have huge negative repercussions on the rights of children in education. It is watering down of the fundamental right to education that every child has in our country and goes against the very spirit of the RTE Act which is formalising education and building standards for quality.

We urge the Hon Minister of HRD, Shri Kapil Sibal to reconsider this amendment to the Act. Our reasons are as follows.

Children with disabilities are the single largest group of out of school children which was 34.19% in 2005 and remained 34.12% in 2009 according to the SRI-IMRB study. Children with disabilities are the largest group of out of school children even in comparison to other groups like SC, ST and Muslim population.

In such a situation giving an option of the home based education will serve to push out the child from the system. Field experience shows that children with disabilities have been consistently pushed out of the system. Parents of children who are vulnerable are unlikely to be in an equitable relationship with the education system. They are unlikely to be able exercise choice given the resistance the system already has to their children.

If today we legitimize home based education, we will roll back in time and just strengthen the push out factors for all children who are vulnerable within the system

Such an option is likely to foster, great social isolation, exclusion from community and peers and devalue the child. It is likely to exclude the child from many other entitlements and also to expose the child to a lack of protection that social isolation brings. The quality of life of any child will be seriously compromised if we isolate them in the home.

The label of severe and profound disability on a child is a deeply questionable practice in our country. The UN Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities which India has ratified rejects the purely medical parameters that India uses to label children and people with disabilities.

All laws relating to persons with disabilities are being either amended or rewritten at this time even in our own country. It is unclear to us why the MHRD has chosen to use concepts and thinking that is now changing.

By legitimising home based education we are legitimising non formal education for one set of children in the law that outlines a fundamental right in our country. We see this as a grave injustice to the right of the child to a legitimate education.